{"id":980,"date":"2008-03-16T14:47:36","date_gmt":"2008-03-16T14:47:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/new.conectas.org.inf.br\/wp\/noticias\/conectas-participates-in-historic-supreme-court-session\/"},"modified":"2021-04-29T13:52:57","modified_gmt":"2021-04-29T13:52:57","slug":"conectas-participates-in-historic-supreme-court-session","status":"publish","type":"noticia","link":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/noticias\/conectas-participates-in-historic-supreme-court-session\/","title":"Conectas participates in historic Supreme Court session","content":"

\n

16\/03\/2008
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Ruling on the case questioning embryonic
\nstem cell research is considered by justices and participants one of the
\nmost important in the history of the Brazilian Supreme Court<\/em><\/p>\n

On
\nMarch 5, Conectas Human Rights participated, also representing the
\nHuman Rights Center (CDH), in the Supreme Court (STF) session in
\nBrasilia to rule on the case ADI 3510<\/a>
\n(in Portuguese) calling into question the constitutionality of article 5
\nof Brazil’s Biosecurity Law that permits scientific research with
\nembryonic stem cells for medical purposes.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n

<\/a>
\nOscar
\nVilhena Vieira, legal director at Conectas Human Rights, presenting his
\narguments during the judgment of the case that questions the
\npossibility of conducting scientific research with stem cells
\nDownload the full video at https:\/\/conectas.org\/arquivospublicados\/falaOscar05.03.08.wmv<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

A
\nConectas was one of the organizations granted amicus curiae status for
\nthe case and, as such, had the right to make an oral submission during
\nthe session (read the full amicus brief here<\/a>, in portuguese) to present its arguments in favor of medical research.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The
\nsession, which lasted approximately 5 hours, was adjourned after
\nJustice Menezes Direito formally requested more time to study the
\nmatter. The debate has been playing out in the STF for three years, but
\nthe judgment of the case now has two votes in favor of the
\nconstitutionality of the Biosecurity Law: the presiding judge in the
\ncase, Justice Carlos Ayres Britto, and the current Chief Justice, Ellen
\nGracie, who advanced her vote (read both votes in full here<\/a>,
\nin portuguese). “This is the most important case in the entire history
\nof the court, since it involves the right to life”,explained Justice
\nCelso de Mello in an interview with a local newspaper a week before the
\nsession.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

The session<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

After a
\npresentation of the case by Justice Carlos Ayres Britto, the court was
\naddressed by Brazilian Attorney General Ant\u00f4nio Fernando de Souza,
\nrepresenting the Office of the Attorney General, which was responsible
\nfor filing the motion. De Souza argued that since life begins at
\nfertilization, an embryo can be considered human and should therefore be
\nprotected. Also defending the unconstitutionality of the law, the first
\namicus curiae, represented by the lawyer Ives Gandra Martins on behalf
\nof the National Conference of Brazilian Bishops (CNBB), condemned the
\nuse of embryos in research.<\/p>\n

the opposing camp, the
\nBrazilian Solicitor General Jos\u00e9 Ant\u00f4nio Dias Toffoli was the first to
\nspeak in defense of the constitutionality of the Biosecurity Law. He
\nheld that an embryo is not the same as a fetus and likening one to a
\nhuman being would force numerous other issues to be reviewed, such as,
\nfor example, how to guarantee life for all frozen embryos. Leonardo
\nMundim spoke on behalf of the National Congress and emphasized that more
\nthan 90% of the embryos frozen at fertilization clinics are disposed of
\nand failure to use them in research could be a setback for Brazilian
\nscience.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

A packed plenary session. People with disabilities and degenerative diseases closely followed the judgment<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

T<\/span>he
\nspokesperson for Conectas Human Rights and the Human Rights Center
\n(CDH), Oscar Vilhena Vieira, made his presentation in defense of the
\nconstitutionality of this research, arguing that an embryo cannot be
\nlegally equated with a person. He pointed out that the law is very clear
\nin only permitting research with non-viable embryos that have no chance
\nof ever coming to term, noting that their use in medical research will
\nhelp find cures to preserve the life and human dignity of people
\nsuffering diseases. He also stressed that at no point does the
\nBrazilian Constitution address the right to life before birth. What it
\ndoes protect is the right to life of Brazilians ‘by birth’, i.e. those
\nalready born, which, he claimed, invalidates the argument for the
\nunconstitutionality of embryonic stem cell research (view the full oral presentation here<\/a>).<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The
\nlast lawyer to address the court was Lu\u00eds Roberto Barroso, on behalf of
\nthe Pro-Life Movement (Movitae) and the Bioethics, Human Rights and
\nGender Institute (Anis), who stressed that Brazilian citizens have the
\nright to choose whether to donate their embryos for research purposes
\nand that the STF has the duty to allow them to make this choice. He also
\nraised the point that the fate of these embryos – disposal – already
\nsealed and their use by medical science will help people who rely on
\nthis research to give them some hope of recovery.<\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe votes of the Justices<\/strong><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n


\nAfter
\nthe amicus curiae presentations to the court, the presiding judge in
\nthe case, Justice Carlos Ayres Britto, read out his vote before the
\nplenary session. He ruled that the article in question is constitutional
\nand that the law properly regulates the sector. He based his decision
\non the fact that the Brazilian Constitution protects life the
\nmoment of birth, making a reference to the ?biographical? human being,
\nwith established bonds and a history, and claiming that embryos cannot
\njustifiably be considered citizens ? only after birth does a human being
\nacquire legal and civil status. In a long delivery that lasted more
\nthan an hour, the justice also stressed that the Biosecurity Law
\nprotects embryos by prohibiting their commercialization, by only
\npermitting research with non-viable embryos and by requiring the prior
\nconsent of donors for use in research.<\/span><\/p>\n


\nAfter the presiding
\njudge’s vote, Justice Menezes Direito formally requested an adjournment,
\nclaiming that he needed more time to decide on such a complex issue.
\nEven though the final outcome would now be postponed, Chief Justice
\nEllen Gracie, who was presiding over the session, advanced her vote.
\nAddressing the court, she said she saw nothing unconstitutional about
\nthe law and ruled in line with Justice Britto. The Chief Justice urged
\nJustice Direito to be brief in his analysis so the court can reconvene
\nshortly to complete its ruling, since research has been put on hold as a
\nresult of the case. She also reminded those present that the court is
\noverburdened, with more than 580 cases awaiting judgment, and that the
\nstem cell case has already been pending in the court for three years.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n<\/div>

<\/div>","excerpt":"

Ruling on the case questioning embryonic stem cell research is considered by justices and participants one of the most important in the history of the…<\/p>\n","author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[7],"tags":[12958,12706,12957],"tema":[12277],"class_list":["post-980","noticia","type-noticia","status-publish","hentry","category-news","tag-human-rights-center","tag-stf-en","tag-supreme-court-session","tema-institutional"],"acf":{"subtitle-pt":"Ruling on the case questioning embryonic stem cell research is considered by justices and participants one of the most important in the history of the Brazilian Supreme Court","author":false},"yoast":{"focuskw":"","title":"","metadesc":"","linkdex":"","metakeywords":"","meta-robots-noindex":"","meta-robots-nofollow":"","meta-robots-adv":"","canonical":"","redirect":"","opengraph-title":"","opengraph-description":"","opengraph-image":"","twitter-title":"","twitter-description":"","twitter-image":""},"featured_image":[],"terms":{"acoes_categorias":[],"acoes_tags":[],"category":[{"term_id":7,"name":"News","slug":"news","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":7,"taxonomy":"category","description":"","parent":0,"count":1520,"filter":"raw","term_order":"0","permalink":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/category\/news\/","relative_link":"category\/news\/","langs":{"en":"news","br":"noticia-conectas"}}],"post_tag":[{"term_id":12958,"name":"Human Rights Center","slug":"human-rights-center","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":12958,"taxonomy":"post_tag","description":"","parent":0,"count":1,"filter":"raw","term_order":"0","permalink":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/tag\/human-rights-center\/","relative_link":"tag\/human-rights-center\/","langs":{"en":"human-rights-center","br":null}},{"term_id":12706,"name":"STF","slug":"stf-en","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":12706,"taxonomy":"post_tag","description":"","parent":0,"count":22,"filter":"raw","term_order":"0","permalink":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/tag\/stf-en\/","relative_link":"tag\/stf-en\/","langs":{"en":"stf-en","br":null}},{"term_id":12957,"name":"Supreme Court session","slug":"supreme-court-session","term_group":0,"term_taxonomy_id":12957,"taxonomy":"post_tag","description":"","parent":0,"count":1,"filter":"raw","term_order":"0","permalink":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/tag\/supreme-court-session\/","relative_link":"tag\/supreme-court-session\/","langs":{"en":"supreme-court-session","br":null}}]},"author_name":"Leonardo Medeiros","author_nicename":"leonardo-medeiros","protected":false,"langs":{"en":"conectas-participates-in-historic-supreme-court-session","br":"conectas-participates-in-historic-supreme-court-session"},"permalink":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/noticias\/conectas-participates-in-historic-supreme-court-session\/","relative_url":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/noticias\/conectas-participates-in-historic-supreme-court-session\/","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/noticias\/980","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/noticias"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/noticia"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=980"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=980"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=980"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=980"},{"taxonomy":"tema","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/conectas.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tema?post=980"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}